- All Debates
- Popular Debates
- Active Debates
- New Debates
- Open Challenge Debates
- My Challenge Debates
- Accepted Challenges
- Debate Communities
- Argument Waterfall
- New People
- People by Points
Does Home Schooling Turn Kids into Weirdos?
Difficult to answer, as the question is centered around the quality of the learning environment available at the particular home, due to the parents, guardians, ect. If done correctly under the supervision of reasonably intelligent, informed, level-headed adults, then home schooling is far, far superior to the public school program. However, it could also be disastrous, if the parents are extreme ideologues of some sort, unbalanced, doltish, ect. ect.
I have debated this b4. If it really exist it would have caused a vast population reduction bc that’s only practical way to save the planet. We r already at point of no return so ALL HUMANS are doomed eventually. A true Illuminati would have self preserved and stepped in b4 now. That’s your proof against it
I would argue a fetus ( and even a fertilized egg ) is a human life
Yes many insist not only that a fetus is a human being, but that this status is an objective scientific fact. Unfortunately, they are assuming the very thing that requires proving, thereby committing the logical fallacy of "begging the question." Biology, medicine, law, philosophy, and theology have no consensus on the issue, and neither does society as a whole. There will never be a consensus because of the subjective and unscientific nature of the claim, so we must give the benefit of the doubt to women, who are indisputable human beings with rights.
Well, one man's terrorist is someone else's freedom fighter.
In such a scenario it is doubtful that the occupying force would permit democratic elections, such as the Polish were denied by the old Communist U.S.S.R, but which is afforded to the electorate of Northern Ireland.
Even in the circumstance of denial of a free vote terrorism always turns into bloody carnage as we observe with horror in Syria.
Gandhi was able to achieve independence for India through his brilliant powers of persuasion and, perhaps more importantly, being able to walk 1000s of miles in a pair of flip flops.
I mean 50 metres along the beach is enough for me.
It's not a potential human, it is a human.
It’s not , you’ve already admitted as much you idiot in your last post
Here you go ... ..It’s not , it is a “ potential “ human in the making
Your exact words when I said it was a potential human in the making , so why are you lying ?
Already. Women can't give birth to fish.
I’m starting to doubt that as you’re displaying the intellect of a fish
I'm fully aware of your immorality.
You’re a judgemental hypocrite
Where's your evidence?
So you’re now asking me for evidence of what you claim , you are anti abortion are you ?
Also, what makes a fetus' cells different from a newborn's cells?
What this is meant to be getting at I’ve no idea
There was no jump to begin with.
Yes you don’t do logic , my mistake for giving you credit you’re not due
No, you simply don't enjoy it when others use your view and put into any other circumstance.
You mean like your ridiculous garden lawn argument ?
Let me ask, how is it different? Killing an adult and killing a baby?
But a fetus is not a baby it’s a potential life in the making you agreed with this already
How is it that you admit it’s immoral to prevent a potential human to be born yet hypocritically defend abortion which does exactly this ?
I don't assume they're correct because I say they are,
You do until corrected then you resort to lying like your first post on this thread or failing that hypocrisy as in your defence of contraception
It doesn't upset me, but I wish you'd make an argument excluding feelings.
But I’ve destroyed every one of your “ arguments “ so now you’re lying in an attempt to save face
Woman’s body , woman’s choice
And why's that? If not for him, how did the baby get there in the first place?
I said he gets a choice but the woman’s choice takes precedence
No, it's not right.
So you don’t care if the man wishes to abort but you do if it’s the woman ?
See, this is gibberish. What are you saying?
I just told you read above
Then let him make that choice.
So you’re fine with him making a choice but not the woman unless she’s anti abortion?
I can't tell anyone what to do,
But yet people like you if they could would deny them a choice
and neither can you.
That’s why I don’t , I leave it up to the individual woman
Back to being petty, are we?
No , just correcting you again
Well, in that case, what about the 63 other genders some of your liberal friends propose exist ?
My “ liberal friends “ what are you talking about you idiot ?
so she wouldn't be making the choice in the first place.
What are you babbling about ?
Let me ask you this: Who/what gives you "bodily rights"?
It’s actually called bodily integrity why not do some research instead of just shooting your fool mouth off ?
Certainly not the government, there isn't an abortion section of the First Amendment.
Your stupidity is spectacular bodily integrity look it up
, where does she get her bodily rights from?
You stand for abortion, so you clearly aren't being fair to the human you're killing.
I stand for choice so you’re wrong yet again
I can't read the rest of your argument, which is most likely due to you placing your asterisks incorrectly and not proof-reading. I'll be glad to address those when you fix it.
Because to site crashed earlier and I never had the chance to check , anyway it was only me having a laugh at your “ Evolution is not a fact nonsense “ on the other thread
Fair enough. I just couldn't tell if you were referencing the topic or not. It's true, we know Hitler will be evil in the future. Even then, at the present time the baby would be innocent. Real questions (not arguments): How do you justify administering retribution, particularly death, to someone who's totally innocent? Why is that morally preferable to waiting until they grow-up and start to conspire? Moreover, why kill them? Wouldn't altering their life in attempt to prevent that person from deteriorating to evil in the first place be preferable since no death is involved?
I don't hate jews, I just hate religion and racial elitism. The kind of elitism that makes you say "It's only natural that my race should take over the world, because we are smarter than everyone else".
At least I HAVE a test.. All you got is your flapping gums.
Your test doesn't actually go against anything I'm saying you meandering bag of fuckwits. Why don't you just answer the question next time instead of running your mouth about irrelevant BS? Ashkenazi Jews are Ashkenazi Jews, that's all your test is says. You are simply ignoring the fact that most of what an Ashkenazi Jew is is european as well as all the other middle eastern nations the jews intersected with. All I am trying to tell you is that very little of your DNA actually comes from HEBREWS who are specifically what the Torah is talking about when it says "God's chosen people."
Everyone in modern times who calls themselves a jew is merely following/associating with an ancient middle eastern tribal race cult who they have very little if any genetic relation too by virtue of that tribe interbreeding and mixing with other cultures for thousands of years.
As a self proclaimed atheist you should see where I am coming from. If you would only accept the fact that you are a white european with only tiny traces of Hebrew DNA. I might as well start worshiping Odin and call myself a viking if you think modern jews are "God's chosen people"